Case Study: U.S. Government Implementation of Nutrition-Sensitive Development
The United States has recently made efforts to synergize the
expertise of multiple government agencies through Feed the
Future (FTF) and the Global Health Initiative (GHI) to make U.S.
development efforts more nutrition-sensitive, especially in the
critical 1,000-day window of opportunity.52 Currently, the U.S.
government categorizes GHI and FTF nutrition interventions53
as either nutrition-sensitive or nutrition-focused, but it has not
clearly defined or provided guidance on the implementation of
these interventions, nor has it articulated how such activities
contribute to improving nutrition outcomes.
A harmonized nutrition strategy should explicitly
incorporate government-wide definitions of nutrition-sensitive
development and nutrition-specific (direct) interventions. The
Nutrition, Assessment, Counseling, and Support (NACS)54
approach—mainly implemented through the President’s
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)—strengthens the
capacity of facility- and community-based healthcare providers
to deliver nutrition-specific services while also linking clients
to nutrition-sensitive development efforts provided by the
health, agriculture, food security, social protection, education,
and rural development sectors.
Feed the Future programs do not clearly outline and
emphasize the integration of nutrition-specific complementary
interventions and objectives into agricultural programs; rather,
nutrition and agriculture interventions are proposed in parallel
structures. Feed the Future programs should demonstrate
which direct nutrition-specific interventions and programs
address the underlying determinants of nutrition by mean